KING JESUS IS COMING FOR US ANY TIME NOW. THE RAPTURE. BE PREPARED TO GO.
ALL THE VATICAN/ POPE NEWS STORIES I HAVE DONE SINCE FEB 11,13 WHEN THE POPE BENEDICT RESIGNED.
http://israndjer.blogspot.ca/2013/02/stock-results-feb-112013.html
http://vaticaninsider.lastampa.it/en/inquiries-and-interviews/detail/articolo/conclave-23034/
The initial scrutiny for the election of Benedict XVI’s successor is the equivalent of political primaries. This is when the real candidates will shine through, those who have the strongest chances of getting majority votes. These will be the candidates who emerged as favourites in last week’s informal meetings.The 2005 Conclave was a first for all but two cardinals. While the crowds paid their respects to Pope Wojtyla, a number of influential cardinals were subtly trying to push for the election of the strongest candidate among the cardinals: the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Joseph Ratzinger. The so-called “progressivists”, who were already at death’s door so to speak, tried to get Cardinal Carlo Maria Martini through but he only obtained 12 votes in the first scrutiny, while Ratzinger obtained a consistently high majority, with 47 votes in his favour. This time there is much more uncertainty but it is highly unlikely groups of electors will be trying to reach a consensus on the basis of a cardinals’ nationality. What has emerged from the recently held discussions is that cardinals are looking for a man with spiritual depth, who is able to govern, engage in dialogue and communicate. Even if there is no candidate who has quite the same authority and power as Ratzinger, the almost unanimous decision to bring the Conclave forward proves that something must have happened between Wednesday and Thursday.Although any prediction should be taken with a pinch of salt, interviews with various cardinals seem to confirm the Archbishop of Milan, Angelo Scola, as a solid candidate for the papacy as he is believed to have a significant number of votes under his belt. Another candidate who should have a good head start in terms of votes, is U.S. cardinal Timothy Dolan. Consensus is also likely to be reached on Canadian cardinals, Marc Ouellet. Scola, Dolan and Ouellet are fishing from pools of voters who are partly superimposable. So it could be that in the second voting session, some of their consensuses are be transferred to the candidate who turns out to be strongest. The Archbishop of Budapest Peter Erdö belongs to this group. Helooks to take a backseat in the first voting session but if there is a stalemate situation prevails his name could be considered. The Archbishop of Boston, Cardinal Sean O’Malley also fits into this group. Various statements made in recent days have shown that this time, the U.S. Church is destined to play a more prominent role than in the past, in terms of candidates and influence.
Which papabile will become Scola’s “rival” for the papacy? The name that is being mentioned recurrently is that of the Archbishop of São Paulo, Cardinal Odilo Pedro Scherer. He has extensive experience working in the Curia, as well as being a member of the Vatican Bank (IOR)’s supervisory committee and in the fifteen-strong council of cardinals that deals with the Holy See’s finances: There are some Curia members who could form a consensus to vote for him. The name of the Vatican “minister of culture”, Cardinal Gian Franco Ravasi is off the radar for the time being. He could receive the votes of cardinals who are closest to the Secretary of State, Tarcisio Bertone.How will Asian, African and Latin American cardinals vote? The Latin Americans could very well vote for a candidate from their continent. Another two South American cardinals we should keep an eye out for are the Archbishop of Guadalajara, José Francisco Robles Ortega and the Archbishop of Buenos Aires, Jorge Mario Bergoglio. Both of them are outsiders who could be considered if the voting process is prolonged. The same goes for the Filippino Luis Antonio Tagle and the Archbishop of Colombo, Malcolm Ranijth who has held roles in the Curia twice.Votes for internal Curia candidacies, however, do not seem to be consistent: during yesterday morning’s ninth General Congregation, a number of cardinals were critical of the Curia’s management, its involvement in all the various scandals, financial questions, the excessive number of Italian nominations and the problems in the functioning of dicasteries and the Secretariat of State.
WITH ONE DAY LEFT TILL THE CARDINALS VOTE AT THE SISTINE FOR THE NEXT POPE.LETS LOOK AT THE ISRAEL/VATICAN RELATIONS.AS THESE 2 PLAYERS WILL BE PLAYING MAJOR ROLES IN FULFILING PROPHECIES IN THESE LAST MINUTES OF THESE LAST DAYS OF THE AGE OF GRACE.THE WORLD NEVER ENDS.BUT ALL HELL WILL BE BREAKING OUT ON EARTH.SO THE NEXT POPE WILL BE PLAYING A MAJOR ROLE IN BRINGING ABOUT WORLD GOVERNMENT AND THE ONE WORLD RELIGIOUS SYSTEM.AND SINCE ISRAEL IS THE HEART OF THE 3 RELIGIONS.WE KNOW THE VATICAN AS WELL AS THE EUROPEAN UNION WILL BE PLAYING A ROLE IN BRINGING OUT A PEACE DEAL BETWEEN ISRAEL/ARABS AND MANY NATIONS.AND SINCE THE BIBLE SAYS THE WORLD DICTATOR AND THE FALSE PROPHET (POPE) FROM 7 MOUNTAINS WILL BE WORKING CLOSELY TOGETHER.WE CAN SAFELY SAY THE NEXT POPE WILL BE PLAYING A MAJOR ROLE IN THE PEACE PROCESS WITH THE PRESIDENT OF THE EUROPEAN UNION AS WELL.
THE VATICAN WAS JUST GIVIN CONTROL OF THE UPPER ROOM WERE JESUS HAD HIS LAST SUPPER WITH THE 12 DISCIPLES.THE VATICAN WANTS CONTROL OF ALL THE HOLY SITES IN ISRAEL.AND WANTS TO MAKE JERUSALEM AN INTERNATIONAL CITY.NOT JUST ISRAELS CAPITAL.BUT THE VATICAN WANTS TO CONTROL JERUSALEM SO ALL FAITHS CAN COME TO THE TEMPLE MOUNT.THE DOME OF THE ROCK FOR MUSLIMS IS ALREADY ON THE TEMPLE MOUNT.THE BIBLE SAYS THE 3RD TEMPLE BY ISRAEL WILL BE REBUILT ON THE TEMPLE MOUNT ALSO.I BELIEVE BY THE DOME OF THE SPIRITS.THIS WILL LET CHRISTIANS,JEWS AND MUSLIMS ALL WORSHIP ON THE TEMPLE MOUNT AT ONCE.LIKE THE VATICAN WANTS.AN INTERNATIONAL JERUSALEM CONTROLED BY THE VATICAN.SO WE SEE BY PROPHECY WHEN THESE ANALYSTS ARE CALLING FOR THE NEXT POPE TO BE A GOOD GOVERNENANCE MAN.WE KNOW THAT THIS CALLING IS GOING BY THE BIBLE.SINCE THE VATICAN WILLBE PLAYING A MAJOR ROLE IN THE PEACE PROCESS AND THE DIVISION OF JERUSALEM.BUT NO MATTER HOW THE WORLD PRESSURES ISRAEL TO GIVE UP JERUSALEM-THEY NEVER WILL TOTALLY.BUT OVIOUSLY ISRAEL WLL SHARE SOME POWER WITH THE VATICAN AND THE EUROPEAN UNION IN BEING PRESSURED TO DIVIDE JERUSALEM.BUT OVERALL WE KNOW BY THE BIBLE THAT ISRAEL WILL ALWAYS HAVE THE MAJOR ROLE OVER JERUSALEM.AND MAJOR DECISIONS WILL BE DECIDED BY ISRAEL,NOT THE VATICAN.NOT THE EUROPEAN UNION PRESIDENT.NOT AMERICA.BUT ISRAEL.
SO THE NEXT POPE WILL BE A VERY IMPORTANT ONE IN POLITICS IN THE MIDEAST.SO STARTING TOMORROW WHEN THE 115 CARDINALS PUT THEIR VOTES IN FOR THE NEXT POPE.WHEN THAT WHITE OR GREY SMOKE COMES FROM THAT CHIMNEY AND THE NEXT POPE IS ELECTED.HE WILL NOT ONLY HAVE TO STRAIGHTEN OUT THE VATICAN.BUT HE WILL BE PROMOTING WORLD GOVERNMENT,WORLD RELIGION AND PEACE IN THE MIDEAST.SO WE CAN SEE WHY THE LAST POPE WILL BE GOING THREW SUCH TRIBULATIONS AND DECISIONS IN THE VATICAN.
REVELATION 11:1-2
1 And there was given me a(MEASURING) reed like unto a rod: and the angel stood, saying, Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein.
2 But the court which is without the temple leave out,(TO THE WORLD NATIONS) and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months.(JERUSALEM DIVIDED BUT THE 3RD TEMPLE ALLOWED TO BE REBUILT)
DANIEL 9:27
27 And he( THE ROMAN,EU PRESIDENT) shall confirm the covenant with many for one week:(1X7=7 YEARS) and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease,(3 1/2 yrs in TEMPLE SACRIFICES STOPPED) and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.
Israel, Vatican near historic relationship upgrade'
By HERB KEINON 01/30/2013 03:54 -JERUSALEM POST
Deputy Foreign Minister Ayalon: J'lem is on verge of signing agreement to formalize diplomatic relations with the Holy See.Vatican Assembly Vatican Assembly Photo: Reuters.After 14 years of glacial negotiations, Israel and the Vatican are on the verge of signing a long-elusive agreement that would formalize diplomatic relations, Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon said on Tuesday.
Ayalon’s comments to The Jerusalem Post came after a meeting in Jerusalem of a working commission that has been trying to iron out various issues between Israel and the Holy See since 1999.
Israel and the Vatican established diplomatic ties in 1993.
“In the last four years a lot of ground has been covered, and after long, intensive and serious negotiations we have overcome most if not all the outstanding issues that have prevented signing of this agreement for so long,” Ayalon said.He said the two sides were “on the verge of signing, subject to final approval by the government of Israel and the Holy See.”Ayalon explained that the final agreement was not signed on Tuesday, because it was not appropriate for a caretaker government to sign the agreement, and that the actual acceptance and signing should be left to the next government.“All the ground work is finished and I trust the new government will sign soon, which is nothing short of a milestone in the relationship,” he said.Ayalon, who has led the negotiations with the Vatican for the past four years, but will be leaving his post next week, said the conclusion of the agreement signifies a “real upgrade in relations between Israel and the Holy See, and between the Jewish people and one billion Catholics around the world, to the benefit of both sides.”Ayalon and his counterpart from the Vatican, Ettore Balestrero, the under-secretary of the Holy See for the relations with states, issued a joint communiqué saying the joint commission that met on Tuesday “took notice that significant progress was made and looks forward to a speedy conclusion of the agreement.”Jerusalem expects this agreement to improve relations not only with the Vatican, but also with other Catholic countries around the world for whom the Vatican’s position vis-a-vis Israel is important.Over the years the discussions have centered around three main issues: the status of the Catholic Church in Israel; the issue of sovereignty over some 21 sites in the country, including the Cenacle – the site of the Last Supper on Mount Zion; and taxation and expropriation issues.
Ayalon said that agreements have been reached on each of the issues.The most contentious was the issue of sovereignty over the Last Supper Room, with the Catholic Church demanding ownership, and Israel not willing to relinquish it. The two sides have essentially agreed to disagree on the matter, but not let it stand in the way of the overall accord.While the Catholic Church does not pay taxes on its properties in Israel, under the agreement, religious institutions owned by the Holy See will be exempted from tax, just as synagogues and mosques are, but church-owned businesses will not.The agreement also works out the issue of expropriating Church property for infrastructure purposes, with a list of five sites – including the Mount of Beatitudes and Capernaum near Lake Kinneret (the Sea of Galilee) and the Church of the Annunciation in Nazareth – where land expropriation would not be allowed except for public safety in situations of emergency, and then only after coordination with the Church.
ISRAEL/VATICAN RELATIONS.
http://www.mfa.gov.il/PopeinIsrael/Israel-Vatican/Israel-Vatican_Diplomatic_Relations.htm
http://www.jpost.com/DiplomacyAndPolitics/Article.aspx?id=301475
Israel-Vatican Diplomatic Relations
Diplomatic relations between Israel and the Holy See established in 1993 were preceded by almost a century of contacts and diplomatic activity.Full and formal diplomatic relations between Israel and the Holy See were established in 1993. They were preceded, however, by almost a century of contacts and diplomatic activity, not to mention almost two millennia of Catholic-Jewish encounters that at times were far from harmonious.
1. The pre-State era
In 1897, when the Zionist idea was beginning to gain currency in Europe, and four months before the First Zionist Congress was held in Basle, the authoritative Jesuit journal, Civiltà Cattolica, let it be known that a Jewish state in the Holy Land with Jerusalem as its capital and with custody of the Holy Places was unthinkable for the Catholic Church.
Seven years later, in 1904, the founder of the Zionist Movement, Theodor Herzl, met with Pope Pius X, in the hope of gaining the Holy See's support for the Zionist enterprise. Pius rebuffed him, declaring that the Church could not recognize the Jewish people and its aspirations in Palestine, since the Jews "have not recognized our Lord". Herzl was moved by political considerations; the Pope’s response derived from Catholic theology.
Zionist contacts with the Church's hierarchy and authoritative Vatican pronouncements regarding Zionist ambitions were sporadic over the next four decades, which embraced two World Wars. However, they were sufficient to confirm basic, and consistent, elements in the Vatican's position prefigured, as it were, by Civiltà Cattolica and Pius X. The Holy See was opposed to a Jewish homeland in Palestine, especially as envisaged in the British Balfour Declaration of 2 November 1917. The Holy Places were a vital interest and Jewish custody of them was not acceptable. Their disposition and safeguarding were matters to be determined between the Church and the Great Powers. There were theological problems surrounding a possible Jewish sovereignty in the Holy Land.
UN General Assembly Resolution 181 of 29 November 1947 (the "Partition Resolution"), envisaging a "corpus separatum" status for Jerusalem and its environs, was viewed favorably by the Vatican. However, that resolution was promptly rejected by the Arab states and, following the hostilities of 1948, the "corpus separatum" (separate entity) for Jerusalem did not come about.
In October of that year, Pope Pius XII, deeply disturbed by the violent conflict in the Holy Land, issued an encyclical, In Multiplicibus Curis, in which he called on the peace-makers to give Jerusalem and its outskirts "an international character" and to assure - "with international guarantees" - freedom of access and worship at the Holy Places scattered throughout Palestine. In a second encyclical, Redemptoris Nostra of April 1949, Pius appealed for justice for the Palestinian refugees and repeated his call for an "international status" as the best form of protection for the Holy Places. The Vatican's official position on the issue, as well as on the refugee question, had essentially been laid down for the next two decades.
2. The post-State era - de facto recognition
In 1948, the fledgling State of Israel was eager to secure the Holy See's recognition of its sovereignty and of territorial gains, in the light of the Vatican’s moral standing internationally and the influence it enjoyed, to greater or lesser extents, with governments in certain Catholic countries and more than half of the world's Christians. To that end, representatives were sent to the Vatican in September. While the delegation failed to achieve its primary goal, various understandings were reached for dealing with problems of joint concern, partly on a bilateral basis and partly through the Papal Nuncio to the Holy Land and the Patriarchal Vicar to the Galilee. Implicit in these understandings was de facto recognition on the Vatican’s part of the State of Israel - a fact which the Holy See frequently referred to in subsequent dealings with Israel.
The Vatican continued to strive for the internationalization of Jerusalem and the Holy Places. In 1950, it orchestrated an unsuccessful attempt at the United Nations to bring that about. Thereafter, the Vatican did not renew its initiative at the UN but, equally, it did not give up its aspirations for Jerusalem and the Holy Places.
In parallel, the Israel-Vatican contacts progressed at various levels. Of note in the early years, Foreign Minister Moshe Sharrett met with Pius XII in 1952 and the Israel Philharmonic Orchestra played for him in 1955. Israel’s declared aim remained full diplomatic relations with the Holy See. Successive attempts over the next years by Israeli diplomats were to no avail. Pope Paul VI's pilgrimage to the Holy Land in January 1964 was conducted in a manner that made it patently, and painfully, clear that the Holy See did not recognise Israel de jure.
In 1965, the Second Vatican Council promulgated a declaration known as Nostra Aetate, which fundamentally changed the Church’s relationship with the Jews - stating, inter alia, that "God holds the Jews most dear for the sake of their Fathers; He does not repent of the gifts He makes [to them]". Moreover, Jesus' passion (death and crucifixion) "cannot be charged against all Jews, without distinction, then alive, nor against the Jews of today."
If certain theological objections in the way of de jure recognition of Israel had been attenuated, major political stumbling blocks remained. Beyond the issue of Israel's sovereignty over all its territory, including parts of Jerusalem, its lack of recognised borders, and the question of the Holy Places and their protection, the Vatican maintained its concern for the needs of local Catholics as well as for the plight of the Palestinian refugees. In addition, it was apprehensive of a backlash against Christian minorities in Arab countries and indeed the Vatican itself, if it were to recognise Israel de jure. As for Israel, hesitations emerged in certain quarters about full relations with the Vatican, as the ramifications became apparent.
The Six Day War of 1967 changed the geo-political situation in the region. Israel was in firm possession of the whole of the Holy Land west of the River Jordan, including all the Christian Holy Places therein. This led the Vatican to modify its position in a pragmatic way. In an address to Cardinals in December 1967, Paul VI called for a "special statute, internationally guaranteed" for Jerusalem and the Holy Places (rather than internationalization). This remains the Vatican's formal position on the issue until today.
At the same time, high level contacts between the sides continued. Among others, Paul VI received Foreign Minister Abba Eban in 1969, Prime Minister Golda Meir in 1973 and Foreign Minister Moshe Dayan in 1978. Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir was received by Pope John Paul II in 1982. The question of full diplomatic relations was broached in these and other contacts but the Vatican remained reticent and, while Israel made the running, it was not overly pressing.
The first signs of a possible change in atmosphere came after the ascension in 1978 of Pope John Paul II, who was very different in background from his Italian predecessors. As a youth he had had many Jewish friends in his home town of Wadowice; he had witnessed the Holocaust (he himself was pressed into forced labour under the Nazi occupation of Poland); and he sympathized with the national yearnings of the Poles and other peoples. In 1984, he invoked security and tranquility for the Jewish people living in the State of Israel, "as a prerogative of every nation". Addressing Jewish leaders in Miami in September 1987, he recognised the right of the Jewish people to a homeland, "as does any civil nation, according to international law (which is what we seek), for the Jewish people who live in the State of Israel … ."
While others in the Vatican signaled that the theological and now the political impediments to full diplomatic relations with Israel had been largely removed, another five years were to pass before John Paul moved to translate his sentiments into a diplomatic reality. Following the first Gulf War in 1991, the Arab-Israel peace process was reactivated. The PLO recognized Israel and various Arab States established diplomatic ties with the State. In parallel, the Soviet Union and a significant number of states renewed their relations with Israel (broken off after the Six Day War). Additionally, certain leading countries, such as China and India, entered into full diplomatic relations with Israel for the first time, in order to be parties to the multilateral peace talks.
Given that Arab and Palestinian recognition of Israel had not led to upheaval in the Middle East and perhaps sensing that the Holy See might be in a singular predicament of not being able to treat with Israel formally when matters of vital interest to it were eventually discussed in peace negotiations, John Paul sanctioned certain diplomatic "feelers" towards Israel and then took the initiative himself. At the beginning of April 1992, the Israel Ambassador to Italy, Avi Pazner, and his wife were invited to a private audience with the Pope. At the latter's request, the Ambassador offered a survey of the situation in the Middle East, in the course of which he made allusion to the refusal of some Arab states to accept Israel, despite Palestinian recognition and the ongoing peace process. The oblique reference was apparently understood and may have tipped the balance, as ten days later the Vatican's "Foreign Minister", Archbishop Jean-Louis Tauran, informed Ambassador Pazner that John Paul had directed the Curia to open negotiations with a view to the possibility of full diplomatic relations with Israel. After meeting the Pope in October, the Israel Foreign Minister, Shimon Peres (now President of Israel) remarked that, even in the light of the recent recognition of Israel by so many other nations, "to add the Vatican to all these is to really change things".
3. 1993 and onwards - de jure recognition
A year and a half of complicated negotiations culminated with the signing of the Fundamental Agreement between the Holy See and the State of Israel on 30 December 1993. Then, in accordance with the Additional Protocol to the Fundamental Agreement, fully accredited ambassadors were exchanged in May 1994. More in the nature of a framework agreement, the Fundamental Agreement opened the way for the establishment of juridical and fiscal subcommissions to deal with an array of substantive matters that were consciously left outstanding. Adding an unusual dimension, the Agreement acknowledged the unique nature of the relationship between the Church and the Jewish People and reiterated the Church's condemnation of anti-Semitism in all its forms, as voiced in Nostra Aetate.
Since that point in time, Israel and the Holy See have maintained a close diplomatic relationship - which has not been without its periods of strain and even crisis. The deliberations of the juridical sub-committee were concluded relatively quickly with a supplementary agreement signed on 10 December 1997, in which Israel recognised the juridical personality and the authority of canon law within the Catholic Church and its institutions, as well as those of the Latin Patriarchate of Jerusalem and of the Eastern Catholic Patriarchates and their respective dioceses in the territory of Israel, while for their part those ecclesiastical entities recognised prevailing Israeli law in civil and criminal matters. On the other hand, the work of the fiscal sub-committee is still unfinished, due to serious difficulties in bridging the principled positions of the two sides and, from Israel’s point of view, because of the potential fiscal and material implications of any special privileges that may be granted to the Catholic Church for other Christian and non-Christian groups in the country.
A high point in the relationship was reached when Pope John Paul made his Pilgrimage to the Holy Land in the Jubilee Year of 2000. Whilst the religious nature of the visit was pre-eminent, the political aspects could not be ignored - as, for example, when John Paul called on the President of Israel and when he met with the Prime Minister and members of his Cabinet.
High hopes in Israel of a closer political-diplomatic relationship with the Vatican in the wake of that visit were dashed with the outbreak of the second "intifada" in September 2000. Critical of Israel's military response to the Palestinian uprising and of the inevitable halt in the peace process, the Vatican put its diplomatic relationship with Israel on a chilly hold. Mindful, however, not to cause a complete hiatus, the Vatican put greater emphasis on the Jewish-Catholic dimension of the relationship. A number of initiatives were encouraged, including the launching of a remarkable dialogue between the Holy See and the Chief Rabbinate of Israel in 2003, which still goes on productively today.
Strains of a different kind were put on the relationship in 1998 when Muslims in Nazareth sought to build a large mosque adjacent to the Church of the Annunciation with, it was thought, tacit agreement from political elements in Israel. This problem, directly involving a Catholic Holy Place, was only resolved in January 2002 when a governmental committee advanced a landscaping plan effectively putting an end to the building of the mosque. As against that, the diplomatic relations proved their strength and value when the Vatican and Israel worked closely and discreetly to help find a solution to the difficult situation created in April 2002 when armed Palestinian gunmen took control of another Holy Place, the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem, and trapped inside it numbers of clerics (Catholics, Armenians and Greek Orthodox) as well as unarmed Palestinian civilians.
For the most part, the relationship proceeds on an even keel. Ministerial visits to the Holy See are frequent and too numerous to count. The first President of Israel to be received by the Pope was President Moshe Katsav in December 2002. On a day-to-day basis, the Israel Embassy to the Holy See seeks to keep the Vatican informed of official policies on current issues, while the Vatican's Embassy in Jaffa sees to its manifold property and other interests in Israel. Both sides seek avenues to broaden cultural, educational, academic and inter-religious cooperation and understanding. And mundane matters, such as visa problems and the entry into Israel of Catholic clergy from Arab lands not at peace with Israel, are dealt with routinely.
Israel and the Vatican attach particular importance to this diplomatic relationship. In many ways, it is a unique relationship, infused with centuries of Catholic-Jewish encounters, and encompassing interests that both sides regard as paramount. The relationship can therefore be expected to remain solid and vibrant, and to weather the occasional strain that will inevitably recur.
ALL THE VATICAN/ POPE NEWS STORIES I HAVE DONE SINCE FEB 11,13 WHEN THE POPE BENEDICT RESIGNED.
http://israndjer.blogspot.ca/2013/02/stock-results-feb-112013.html
03/11/2013 VATICAN INSIDER
Lombardi: “Black smoke on the horizon tomorrow”
Towards the Conclave
The final preparations are being made for the first day of the Conclave tomorrow. Today 90 support staff will swear an oath of secrecy. They risk excommunication if they do not respect their pledge to silence
Alessandro Speciale vatican city “The first smoke signal is expected to be given at 8 pm tomorrow evening; it is unlikely the outcome will be positive, as this will be the first voting session.” The director of the Holy See Press Office, Fr. Federico Lombardi announced this in today’s press conference.Today’s tenth General Congregation concluded the series of pre-Conclave meetings held by cardinal electors and non-electors ahead of the election of the new Pope.Today there were 152 cardinals present in the Vatican Synod Hall. Today’s 28 speeches bring the total up to 161.During the course of today’s meeting, lots were drawn to choose the 3 cardinals who will take part in the three-day special congregation, along with the Camerlengo. The three cardinals chosen are Naguib, Oueller and Monterisi, Vatican spokesman, Fr. Federico Lombardi said.Today the 90 or so support staff who will be assisting cardinal electors during the Conclave, will swear an oath of secrecy in the Pauline Chapel at 17:30, in a ceremony led by the Camerlengo, Tarcisio Bertone. The support staff include priests who will hear confessions, security staff, cooks, cleaners, technicians, medics and those who will be driving the bus that will take cardinal electors to the Sistine Chapel to vote. There will be no live broadcast of the event, Fr. Lombardi stated.Papal conclave: Cardinals draw lots to settle Vatican guest house rooms -TORONTO STAR
During earlier conclaves, they had
makeshift beds in temporary quarters in the Vatican, with curtains often
all that divided one space from another, like on a hospital ward.
LUCAS OLENIUK
/ TORONTO STAR
A group of students from Montreal's Loyola High School visit the Vatican on Monday morning.
VATICAN CITY—Before they get down to the business of choosing a new pope this week,
the 115 elector cardinals are holding another ballot—drawing lots to
decide which room they get in the Vatican guest house that will be their
home during the conclave.Some will be
disappointed, because the five-storey Santa Martha House inside the
walls of Vatican City, has only 106 “suites”. Despite the grandiose
name, these rooms have just a single bed, bathroom and a small desk
space.The nine cardinals who miss out on the suites will have to settle for more spartan single rooms.However basic the
Santa Martha accommodation, it is a step up from where cardinals used to
sleep before the guest house was built in 1996 on the orders of Pope
John Paul II.
During earlier
conclaves, they had makeshift beds in temporary quarters in the Vatican,
with curtains often all that divided one space from another, like on a
hospital ward.As well as allocating
the rooms fairly, drawing lots is designed to make sure factions from
one country or supporting one candidate are given rooms randomly to
prevent them consulting on strategy from adjoining parts of the guest
house.Standing empty for the
new pope will be the larger but nevertheless simple Room 201, the sole
apartment in the yellow-stone residence block.It has carved wooden
fittings and additional rooms to host meetings for the new pontiff, who
could live there for a few weeks until the papal Apostolic Palace has
been renovated.Adding to Santa
Martha’s austere feel, television, telephone, WiFi and other means of
communication are blocked to maintain the secrecy of the conclave.Santa Martha is only a
few hundred metres from the Sistine Chapel where the cardinals will
start the process on Tuesday of electing a successor to Pope Benedict
after his decision last month to step down.Cardinals, many of
them elderly, will be able to use a shuttle bus to get to the chapel if
they do not want to walk or if Rome sees one of its spectacular spring
storms.The elector cardinals
used Santa Martha for the first time in 2005 when Benedict was chosen to
lead the world’s 1.2 billion Roman Catholics after the death of John
Paul.The building stands on the site of a hospice built in 1891 for cholera victims.Two doctors will be on
hand in case any of the cardinals fall ill, while priests will hear
confessions in a variety of languages. Like the cardinals, they will be
sworn to secrecy.As with any guest
house or hotel, cooks and cleaners will also be there to attend to the
needs of the cardinals. All the staff will have been vetted to help
ensure that no secrets leak out before white smoke emerges to show a
pope has been picked.
03/10/2013 VATICAN INSIDER
Gracias looks for spiritual leader with administrative skills as next Pope
The Cardinal Gracias
Cardinal Gracias, one of India’s five electors in the conclave, hopes the next Pope will be a really spiritual leader, but also a man who likes organization, administration and leadership
Gerard O'Connell Rome Cardinal Oswald Gracias, 69, archbishop of Bombay (Mumbai) and President of the Federation of Asian Bishops’ Conferences, is one of the 10 Asian electors participating in this conclave. Made cardinal in 2007, this is his first conclave, and in this interview he speaks about Benedict XVI’s resignation, and the qualities he is looking for in the man to be next Pope, and what he would like him to do.http://vaticaninsider.lastampa.it/en/inquiries-and-interviews/detail/articolo/conclave-23034/
03/10/2013 VATICAN INSIDER
Conclave: “Primaries” get under way
Conclave: Cardinals are ready
The first voting session to elect the new Pope will take place on Tuesday 12th at 6 pm. The strongest candidates are Scola and Scherer
Andrea Tornielli vatican city The Conclave’s real test, after the “extra omnes” pronounced by the Master of Ceremonies and the closure of the Sistine Chapel’s heavy wooden door, will come at around 6 pm this coming Tuesday.The initial scrutiny for the election of Benedict XVI’s successor is the equivalent of political primaries. This is when the real candidates will shine through, those who have the strongest chances of getting majority votes. These will be the candidates who emerged as favourites in last week’s informal meetings.The 2005 Conclave was a first for all but two cardinals. While the crowds paid their respects to Pope Wojtyla, a number of influential cardinals were subtly trying to push for the election of the strongest candidate among the cardinals: the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Joseph Ratzinger. The so-called “progressivists”, who were already at death’s door so to speak, tried to get Cardinal Carlo Maria Martini through but he only obtained 12 votes in the first scrutiny, while Ratzinger obtained a consistently high majority, with 47 votes in his favour. This time there is much more uncertainty but it is highly unlikely groups of electors will be trying to reach a consensus on the basis of a cardinals’ nationality. What has emerged from the recently held discussions is that cardinals are looking for a man with spiritual depth, who is able to govern, engage in dialogue and communicate. Even if there is no candidate who has quite the same authority and power as Ratzinger, the almost unanimous decision to bring the Conclave forward proves that something must have happened between Wednesday and Thursday.Although any prediction should be taken with a pinch of salt, interviews with various cardinals seem to confirm the Archbishop of Milan, Angelo Scola, as a solid candidate for the papacy as he is believed to have a significant number of votes under his belt. Another candidate who should have a good head start in terms of votes, is U.S. cardinal Timothy Dolan. Consensus is also likely to be reached on Canadian cardinals, Marc Ouellet. Scola, Dolan and Ouellet are fishing from pools of voters who are partly superimposable. So it could be that in the second voting session, some of their consensuses are be transferred to the candidate who turns out to be strongest. The Archbishop of Budapest Peter Erdö belongs to this group. Helooks to take a backseat in the first voting session but if there is a stalemate situation prevails his name could be considered. The Archbishop of Boston, Cardinal Sean O’Malley also fits into this group. Various statements made in recent days have shown that this time, the U.S. Church is destined to play a more prominent role than in the past, in terms of candidates and influence.
Which papabile will become Scola’s “rival” for the papacy? The name that is being mentioned recurrently is that of the Archbishop of São Paulo, Cardinal Odilo Pedro Scherer. He has extensive experience working in the Curia, as well as being a member of the Vatican Bank (IOR)’s supervisory committee and in the fifteen-strong council of cardinals that deals with the Holy See’s finances: There are some Curia members who could form a consensus to vote for him. The name of the Vatican “minister of culture”, Cardinal Gian Franco Ravasi is off the radar for the time being. He could receive the votes of cardinals who are closest to the Secretary of State, Tarcisio Bertone.How will Asian, African and Latin American cardinals vote? The Latin Americans could very well vote for a candidate from their continent. Another two South American cardinals we should keep an eye out for are the Archbishop of Guadalajara, José Francisco Robles Ortega and the Archbishop of Buenos Aires, Jorge Mario Bergoglio. Both of them are outsiders who could be considered if the voting process is prolonged. The same goes for the Filippino Luis Antonio Tagle and the Archbishop of Colombo, Malcolm Ranijth who has held roles in the Curia twice.Votes for internal Curia candidacies, however, do not seem to be consistent: during yesterday morning’s ninth General Congregation, a number of cardinals were critical of the Curia’s management, its involvement in all the various scandals, financial questions, the excessive number of Italian nominations and the problems in the functioning of dicasteries and the Secretariat of State.
WITH ONE DAY LEFT TILL THE CARDINALS VOTE AT THE SISTINE FOR THE NEXT POPE.LETS LOOK AT THE ISRAEL/VATICAN RELATIONS.AS THESE 2 PLAYERS WILL BE PLAYING MAJOR ROLES IN FULFILING PROPHECIES IN THESE LAST MINUTES OF THESE LAST DAYS OF THE AGE OF GRACE.THE WORLD NEVER ENDS.BUT ALL HELL WILL BE BREAKING OUT ON EARTH.SO THE NEXT POPE WILL BE PLAYING A MAJOR ROLE IN BRINGING ABOUT WORLD GOVERNMENT AND THE ONE WORLD RELIGIOUS SYSTEM.AND SINCE ISRAEL IS THE HEART OF THE 3 RELIGIONS.WE KNOW THE VATICAN AS WELL AS THE EUROPEAN UNION WILL BE PLAYING A ROLE IN BRINGING OUT A PEACE DEAL BETWEEN ISRAEL/ARABS AND MANY NATIONS.AND SINCE THE BIBLE SAYS THE WORLD DICTATOR AND THE FALSE PROPHET (POPE) FROM 7 MOUNTAINS WILL BE WORKING CLOSELY TOGETHER.WE CAN SAFELY SAY THE NEXT POPE WILL BE PLAYING A MAJOR ROLE IN THE PEACE PROCESS WITH THE PRESIDENT OF THE EUROPEAN UNION AS WELL.
THE VATICAN WAS JUST GIVIN CONTROL OF THE UPPER ROOM WERE JESUS HAD HIS LAST SUPPER WITH THE 12 DISCIPLES.THE VATICAN WANTS CONTROL OF ALL THE HOLY SITES IN ISRAEL.AND WANTS TO MAKE JERUSALEM AN INTERNATIONAL CITY.NOT JUST ISRAELS CAPITAL.BUT THE VATICAN WANTS TO CONTROL JERUSALEM SO ALL FAITHS CAN COME TO THE TEMPLE MOUNT.THE DOME OF THE ROCK FOR MUSLIMS IS ALREADY ON THE TEMPLE MOUNT.THE BIBLE SAYS THE 3RD TEMPLE BY ISRAEL WILL BE REBUILT ON THE TEMPLE MOUNT ALSO.I BELIEVE BY THE DOME OF THE SPIRITS.THIS WILL LET CHRISTIANS,JEWS AND MUSLIMS ALL WORSHIP ON THE TEMPLE MOUNT AT ONCE.LIKE THE VATICAN WANTS.AN INTERNATIONAL JERUSALEM CONTROLED BY THE VATICAN.SO WE SEE BY PROPHECY WHEN THESE ANALYSTS ARE CALLING FOR THE NEXT POPE TO BE A GOOD GOVERNENANCE MAN.WE KNOW THAT THIS CALLING IS GOING BY THE BIBLE.SINCE THE VATICAN WILLBE PLAYING A MAJOR ROLE IN THE PEACE PROCESS AND THE DIVISION OF JERUSALEM.BUT NO MATTER HOW THE WORLD PRESSURES ISRAEL TO GIVE UP JERUSALEM-THEY NEVER WILL TOTALLY.BUT OVIOUSLY ISRAEL WLL SHARE SOME POWER WITH THE VATICAN AND THE EUROPEAN UNION IN BEING PRESSURED TO DIVIDE JERUSALEM.BUT OVERALL WE KNOW BY THE BIBLE THAT ISRAEL WILL ALWAYS HAVE THE MAJOR ROLE OVER JERUSALEM.AND MAJOR DECISIONS WILL BE DECIDED BY ISRAEL,NOT THE VATICAN.NOT THE EUROPEAN UNION PRESIDENT.NOT AMERICA.BUT ISRAEL.
SO THE NEXT POPE WILL BE A VERY IMPORTANT ONE IN POLITICS IN THE MIDEAST.SO STARTING TOMORROW WHEN THE 115 CARDINALS PUT THEIR VOTES IN FOR THE NEXT POPE.WHEN THAT WHITE OR GREY SMOKE COMES FROM THAT CHIMNEY AND THE NEXT POPE IS ELECTED.HE WILL NOT ONLY HAVE TO STRAIGHTEN OUT THE VATICAN.BUT HE WILL BE PROMOTING WORLD GOVERNMENT,WORLD RELIGION AND PEACE IN THE MIDEAST.SO WE CAN SEE WHY THE LAST POPE WILL BE GOING THREW SUCH TRIBULATIONS AND DECISIONS IN THE VATICAN.
REVELATION 11:1-2
1 And there was given me a(MEASURING) reed like unto a rod: and the angel stood, saying, Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein.
2 But the court which is without the temple leave out,(TO THE WORLD NATIONS) and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months.(JERUSALEM DIVIDED BUT THE 3RD TEMPLE ALLOWED TO BE REBUILT)
DANIEL 9:27
27 And he( THE ROMAN,EU PRESIDENT) shall confirm the covenant with many for one week:(1X7=7 YEARS) and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease,(3 1/2 yrs in TEMPLE SACRIFICES STOPPED) and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.
Israel, Vatican near historic relationship upgrade'
By HERB KEINON 01/30/2013 03:54 -JERUSALEM POST
Deputy Foreign Minister Ayalon: J'lem is on verge of signing agreement to formalize diplomatic relations with the Holy See.Vatican Assembly Vatican Assembly Photo: Reuters.After 14 years of glacial negotiations, Israel and the Vatican are on the verge of signing a long-elusive agreement that would formalize diplomatic relations, Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon said on Tuesday.
Ayalon’s comments to The Jerusalem Post came after a meeting in Jerusalem of a working commission that has been trying to iron out various issues between Israel and the Holy See since 1999.
Israel and the Vatican established diplomatic ties in 1993.
“In the last four years a lot of ground has been covered, and after long, intensive and serious negotiations we have overcome most if not all the outstanding issues that have prevented signing of this agreement for so long,” Ayalon said.He said the two sides were “on the verge of signing, subject to final approval by the government of Israel and the Holy See.”Ayalon explained that the final agreement was not signed on Tuesday, because it was not appropriate for a caretaker government to sign the agreement, and that the actual acceptance and signing should be left to the next government.“All the ground work is finished and I trust the new government will sign soon, which is nothing short of a milestone in the relationship,” he said.Ayalon, who has led the negotiations with the Vatican for the past four years, but will be leaving his post next week, said the conclusion of the agreement signifies a “real upgrade in relations between Israel and the Holy See, and between the Jewish people and one billion Catholics around the world, to the benefit of both sides.”Ayalon and his counterpart from the Vatican, Ettore Balestrero, the under-secretary of the Holy See for the relations with states, issued a joint communiqué saying the joint commission that met on Tuesday “took notice that significant progress was made and looks forward to a speedy conclusion of the agreement.”Jerusalem expects this agreement to improve relations not only with the Vatican, but also with other Catholic countries around the world for whom the Vatican’s position vis-a-vis Israel is important.Over the years the discussions have centered around three main issues: the status of the Catholic Church in Israel; the issue of sovereignty over some 21 sites in the country, including the Cenacle – the site of the Last Supper on Mount Zion; and taxation and expropriation issues.
Ayalon said that agreements have been reached on each of the issues.The most contentious was the issue of sovereignty over the Last Supper Room, with the Catholic Church demanding ownership, and Israel not willing to relinquish it. The two sides have essentially agreed to disagree on the matter, but not let it stand in the way of the overall accord.While the Catholic Church does not pay taxes on its properties in Israel, under the agreement, religious institutions owned by the Holy See will be exempted from tax, just as synagogues and mosques are, but church-owned businesses will not.The agreement also works out the issue of expropriating Church property for infrastructure purposes, with a list of five sites – including the Mount of Beatitudes and Capernaum near Lake Kinneret (the Sea of Galilee) and the Church of the Annunciation in Nazareth – where land expropriation would not be allowed except for public safety in situations of emergency, and then only after coordination with the Church.
ISRAEL/VATICAN RELATIONS.
http://www.mfa.gov.il/PopeinIsrael/Israel-Vatican/Israel-Vatican_Diplomatic_Relations.htm
http://www.jpost.com/DiplomacyAndPolitics/Article.aspx?id=301475
Israel-Vatican Diplomatic Relations
Diplomatic relations between Israel and the Holy See established in 1993 were preceded by almost a century of contacts and diplomatic activity.Full and formal diplomatic relations between Israel and the Holy See were established in 1993. They were preceded, however, by almost a century of contacts and diplomatic activity, not to mention almost two millennia of Catholic-Jewish encounters that at times were far from harmonious.
1. The pre-State era
In 1897, when the Zionist idea was beginning to gain currency in Europe, and four months before the First Zionist Congress was held in Basle, the authoritative Jesuit journal, Civiltà Cattolica, let it be known that a Jewish state in the Holy Land with Jerusalem as its capital and with custody of the Holy Places was unthinkable for the Catholic Church.
Seven years later, in 1904, the founder of the Zionist Movement, Theodor Herzl, met with Pope Pius X, in the hope of gaining the Holy See's support for the Zionist enterprise. Pius rebuffed him, declaring that the Church could not recognize the Jewish people and its aspirations in Palestine, since the Jews "have not recognized our Lord". Herzl was moved by political considerations; the Pope’s response derived from Catholic theology.
Zionist contacts with the Church's hierarchy and authoritative Vatican pronouncements regarding Zionist ambitions were sporadic over the next four decades, which embraced two World Wars. However, they were sufficient to confirm basic, and consistent, elements in the Vatican's position prefigured, as it were, by Civiltà Cattolica and Pius X. The Holy See was opposed to a Jewish homeland in Palestine, especially as envisaged in the British Balfour Declaration of 2 November 1917. The Holy Places were a vital interest and Jewish custody of them was not acceptable. Their disposition and safeguarding were matters to be determined between the Church and the Great Powers. There were theological problems surrounding a possible Jewish sovereignty in the Holy Land.
UN General Assembly Resolution 181 of 29 November 1947 (the "Partition Resolution"), envisaging a "corpus separatum" status for Jerusalem and its environs, was viewed favorably by the Vatican. However, that resolution was promptly rejected by the Arab states and, following the hostilities of 1948, the "corpus separatum" (separate entity) for Jerusalem did not come about.
In October of that year, Pope Pius XII, deeply disturbed by the violent conflict in the Holy Land, issued an encyclical, In Multiplicibus Curis, in which he called on the peace-makers to give Jerusalem and its outskirts "an international character" and to assure - "with international guarantees" - freedom of access and worship at the Holy Places scattered throughout Palestine. In a second encyclical, Redemptoris Nostra of April 1949, Pius appealed for justice for the Palestinian refugees and repeated his call for an "international status" as the best form of protection for the Holy Places. The Vatican's official position on the issue, as well as on the refugee question, had essentially been laid down for the next two decades.
2. The post-State era - de facto recognition
In 1948, the fledgling State of Israel was eager to secure the Holy See's recognition of its sovereignty and of territorial gains, in the light of the Vatican’s moral standing internationally and the influence it enjoyed, to greater or lesser extents, with governments in certain Catholic countries and more than half of the world's Christians. To that end, representatives were sent to the Vatican in September. While the delegation failed to achieve its primary goal, various understandings were reached for dealing with problems of joint concern, partly on a bilateral basis and partly through the Papal Nuncio to the Holy Land and the Patriarchal Vicar to the Galilee. Implicit in these understandings was de facto recognition on the Vatican’s part of the State of Israel - a fact which the Holy See frequently referred to in subsequent dealings with Israel.
The Vatican continued to strive for the internationalization of Jerusalem and the Holy Places. In 1950, it orchestrated an unsuccessful attempt at the United Nations to bring that about. Thereafter, the Vatican did not renew its initiative at the UN but, equally, it did not give up its aspirations for Jerusalem and the Holy Places.
In parallel, the Israel-Vatican contacts progressed at various levels. Of note in the early years, Foreign Minister Moshe Sharrett met with Pius XII in 1952 and the Israel Philharmonic Orchestra played for him in 1955. Israel’s declared aim remained full diplomatic relations with the Holy See. Successive attempts over the next years by Israeli diplomats were to no avail. Pope Paul VI's pilgrimage to the Holy Land in January 1964 was conducted in a manner that made it patently, and painfully, clear that the Holy See did not recognise Israel de jure.
In 1965, the Second Vatican Council promulgated a declaration known as Nostra Aetate, which fundamentally changed the Church’s relationship with the Jews - stating, inter alia, that "God holds the Jews most dear for the sake of their Fathers; He does not repent of the gifts He makes [to them]". Moreover, Jesus' passion (death and crucifixion) "cannot be charged against all Jews, without distinction, then alive, nor against the Jews of today."
If certain theological objections in the way of de jure recognition of Israel had been attenuated, major political stumbling blocks remained. Beyond the issue of Israel's sovereignty over all its territory, including parts of Jerusalem, its lack of recognised borders, and the question of the Holy Places and their protection, the Vatican maintained its concern for the needs of local Catholics as well as for the plight of the Palestinian refugees. In addition, it was apprehensive of a backlash against Christian minorities in Arab countries and indeed the Vatican itself, if it were to recognise Israel de jure. As for Israel, hesitations emerged in certain quarters about full relations with the Vatican, as the ramifications became apparent.
The Six Day War of 1967 changed the geo-political situation in the region. Israel was in firm possession of the whole of the Holy Land west of the River Jordan, including all the Christian Holy Places therein. This led the Vatican to modify its position in a pragmatic way. In an address to Cardinals in December 1967, Paul VI called for a "special statute, internationally guaranteed" for Jerusalem and the Holy Places (rather than internationalization). This remains the Vatican's formal position on the issue until today.
At the same time, high level contacts between the sides continued. Among others, Paul VI received Foreign Minister Abba Eban in 1969, Prime Minister Golda Meir in 1973 and Foreign Minister Moshe Dayan in 1978. Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir was received by Pope John Paul II in 1982. The question of full diplomatic relations was broached in these and other contacts but the Vatican remained reticent and, while Israel made the running, it was not overly pressing.
The first signs of a possible change in atmosphere came after the ascension in 1978 of Pope John Paul II, who was very different in background from his Italian predecessors. As a youth he had had many Jewish friends in his home town of Wadowice; he had witnessed the Holocaust (he himself was pressed into forced labour under the Nazi occupation of Poland); and he sympathized with the national yearnings of the Poles and other peoples. In 1984, he invoked security and tranquility for the Jewish people living in the State of Israel, "as a prerogative of every nation". Addressing Jewish leaders in Miami in September 1987, he recognised the right of the Jewish people to a homeland, "as does any civil nation, according to international law (which is what we seek), for the Jewish people who live in the State of Israel … ."
While others in the Vatican signaled that the theological and now the political impediments to full diplomatic relations with Israel had been largely removed, another five years were to pass before John Paul moved to translate his sentiments into a diplomatic reality. Following the first Gulf War in 1991, the Arab-Israel peace process was reactivated. The PLO recognized Israel and various Arab States established diplomatic ties with the State. In parallel, the Soviet Union and a significant number of states renewed their relations with Israel (broken off after the Six Day War). Additionally, certain leading countries, such as China and India, entered into full diplomatic relations with Israel for the first time, in order to be parties to the multilateral peace talks.
Given that Arab and Palestinian recognition of Israel had not led to upheaval in the Middle East and perhaps sensing that the Holy See might be in a singular predicament of not being able to treat with Israel formally when matters of vital interest to it were eventually discussed in peace negotiations, John Paul sanctioned certain diplomatic "feelers" towards Israel and then took the initiative himself. At the beginning of April 1992, the Israel Ambassador to Italy, Avi Pazner, and his wife were invited to a private audience with the Pope. At the latter's request, the Ambassador offered a survey of the situation in the Middle East, in the course of which he made allusion to the refusal of some Arab states to accept Israel, despite Palestinian recognition and the ongoing peace process. The oblique reference was apparently understood and may have tipped the balance, as ten days later the Vatican's "Foreign Minister", Archbishop Jean-Louis Tauran, informed Ambassador Pazner that John Paul had directed the Curia to open negotiations with a view to the possibility of full diplomatic relations with Israel. After meeting the Pope in October, the Israel Foreign Minister, Shimon Peres (now President of Israel) remarked that, even in the light of the recent recognition of Israel by so many other nations, "to add the Vatican to all these is to really change things".
3. 1993 and onwards - de jure recognition
A year and a half of complicated negotiations culminated with the signing of the Fundamental Agreement between the Holy See and the State of Israel on 30 December 1993. Then, in accordance with the Additional Protocol to the Fundamental Agreement, fully accredited ambassadors were exchanged in May 1994. More in the nature of a framework agreement, the Fundamental Agreement opened the way for the establishment of juridical and fiscal subcommissions to deal with an array of substantive matters that were consciously left outstanding. Adding an unusual dimension, the Agreement acknowledged the unique nature of the relationship between the Church and the Jewish People and reiterated the Church's condemnation of anti-Semitism in all its forms, as voiced in Nostra Aetate.
Since that point in time, Israel and the Holy See have maintained a close diplomatic relationship - which has not been without its periods of strain and even crisis. The deliberations of the juridical sub-committee were concluded relatively quickly with a supplementary agreement signed on 10 December 1997, in which Israel recognised the juridical personality and the authority of canon law within the Catholic Church and its institutions, as well as those of the Latin Patriarchate of Jerusalem and of the Eastern Catholic Patriarchates and their respective dioceses in the territory of Israel, while for their part those ecclesiastical entities recognised prevailing Israeli law in civil and criminal matters. On the other hand, the work of the fiscal sub-committee is still unfinished, due to serious difficulties in bridging the principled positions of the two sides and, from Israel’s point of view, because of the potential fiscal and material implications of any special privileges that may be granted to the Catholic Church for other Christian and non-Christian groups in the country.
A high point in the relationship was reached when Pope John Paul made his Pilgrimage to the Holy Land in the Jubilee Year of 2000. Whilst the religious nature of the visit was pre-eminent, the political aspects could not be ignored - as, for example, when John Paul called on the President of Israel and when he met with the Prime Minister and members of his Cabinet.
High hopes in Israel of a closer political-diplomatic relationship with the Vatican in the wake of that visit were dashed with the outbreak of the second "intifada" in September 2000. Critical of Israel's military response to the Palestinian uprising and of the inevitable halt in the peace process, the Vatican put its diplomatic relationship with Israel on a chilly hold. Mindful, however, not to cause a complete hiatus, the Vatican put greater emphasis on the Jewish-Catholic dimension of the relationship. A number of initiatives were encouraged, including the launching of a remarkable dialogue between the Holy See and the Chief Rabbinate of Israel in 2003, which still goes on productively today.
Strains of a different kind were put on the relationship in 1998 when Muslims in Nazareth sought to build a large mosque adjacent to the Church of the Annunciation with, it was thought, tacit agreement from political elements in Israel. This problem, directly involving a Catholic Holy Place, was only resolved in January 2002 when a governmental committee advanced a landscaping plan effectively putting an end to the building of the mosque. As against that, the diplomatic relations proved their strength and value when the Vatican and Israel worked closely and discreetly to help find a solution to the difficult situation created in April 2002 when armed Palestinian gunmen took control of another Holy Place, the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem, and trapped inside it numbers of clerics (Catholics, Armenians and Greek Orthodox) as well as unarmed Palestinian civilians.
For the most part, the relationship proceeds on an even keel. Ministerial visits to the Holy See are frequent and too numerous to count. The first President of Israel to be received by the Pope was President Moshe Katsav in December 2002. On a day-to-day basis, the Israel Embassy to the Holy See seeks to keep the Vatican informed of official policies on current issues, while the Vatican's Embassy in Jaffa sees to its manifold property and other interests in Israel. Both sides seek avenues to broaden cultural, educational, academic and inter-religious cooperation and understanding. And mundane matters, such as visa problems and the entry into Israel of Catholic clergy from Arab lands not at peace with Israel, are dealt with routinely.
Israel and the Vatican attach particular importance to this diplomatic relationship. In many ways, it is a unique relationship, infused with centuries of Catholic-Jewish encounters, and encompassing interests that both sides regard as paramount. The relationship can therefore be expected to remain solid and vibrant, and to weather the occasional strain that will inevitably recur.
